👉A big thanks to everyone who has pre-ordered a copy of my zine, all of the proceeds will help to support future content like this. 🙏 www.iworthphotos.com/store/30-days-1
There are several reasons I often shoot at ISO 100(especially for landscape situations in difficult light). 1. More dynamic range. Most modern cameras gain 2-3 stops vs ISO 800. 2. Camera shake even hand held is a minor issue, easily handled. Modern mirrorless cameras now sport up to 6-7 stops of on board image stabilization. Shooting at shutter speeds of 1/focal length usually works.
hell of a lot of us don't have modern mirrorless cameras. I think this vid has mass appeal/application when you take that into consideration. I know my (poor) camera skills/shots improved from when I learned not to be frightened of upping the ISO.
Anything below 800 iso is a non issue. Ive gotten amazing shots with 3200 iso. My photography improved once I started to use higher iso. Motion blur and wrong aperture are much more damaging than high iso. Especially on modern cameras. Changes to those two impact how the image looks completely. Once I got comfortable shooting at iso ~800 I could use shorter exposures and smaller apertures which opened up my creativity alot. Now I set aperture, shutter, iso in that order rather than being stuck on max aperture and lowest iso. But thats just my experience. As with any kind of art it comes down to preference. Dont be afraid to explore the options and learn what you prefer. Took a few thousand photos for me to dial in what I like in what situations. My advice is to just get out there and try stuff.
@@najadadavis It's a rule of thumb that dates back to the film era. But yeah with high resolution (36mp and up), you're quite right. If I'm moving while shooting I'll even try and keep it 1/triple focal length if it's at all possible
All of those things about shooting low ISO and shooting high shutter speeds are true if you have a fast, large aperture lens. Most beginers don't have those lenses. This is true even for low light photography and true for Videography with ND filters. You can truly apply these techniques only after you get a right gear.
Just don’t forget that ISO affects more than just noise - high ISO reduces dynamic range and color accuracy. Sometimes the trade off is worth it such as when freezing fast motion or when shooting at narrow apertures but most of the time you’ll get better results just using a tripod
"Just don’t forget that ISO affects more than just noise - high ISO reduces dynamic range and color accuracy." Not really. What reduces those is lowering your exposure, which you'll do when you raise the ISO, if you centre the meter. The effect on noise is the reverse of what people think. If you keep the exposure the same and raise the ISO you'll often reduce the noise, albeit slightly.
@@BobN54 Kinda depends on the sensor and ISO invariance/variance too. Sometimes you'll get a lower quality image by shooting at low ISO and raising in post, than if you just raised the ISO in the first place.
The new cameras usually allows to use really low ISOs although their natural ISO is higher (like 640 in Fuji X-T3 for example). But it allows only with ONE IMPORTANT restriction: you get a lower dynamic range! ISO640 can have 400DR but ISO80-100 can have only 100%DR.
@@orphanuprising Actually, not the sensor but the electronic processing after the sensor, dual-conversion gain, all kinds of stuff. The real point is that it's not 'ISO' that causes noise, it's the lowering of exposure that you get as a result of the ISO control changing the exposure at which the meter centres. It's all related to knowing what 'exposure' means, and that you can't change it in post ;-)
Before increasing ISO to obtain a briefer shutter time, take the 6 stop filter off! maybe put a three stop filter on. Or just a polariser, or polariser and 3 stop. Use a variable ND. Just a thought.
So now you need a 6-stop filter, a 3-stop filter, a polarizer and a variable ND? Not everyone is blessed with such choices in their gear collection. Besides, working your ISO is nothing to be afraid of and a skill you should learn.
@@ontheruntonowhere I disagree, raising ISO should be the last compromise. There are some great tools out their for dealing with higher ISO but they often cost more than a filter 🤷🏻♂️ which anyone with a digital camera, tripod for long exposures, storage cards, a computer to process, and software to process can probably afford an entry filter. And no filter is required at all to extend a shutter speed a few stops if your starting point is 800 iso, just dial down to the cameras base ISO 🤷🏻♂️ Besides the chap in the video has at least three of the four filters referenced! and my reference to a Variable ND was a budget option in place of the 6stop and 10 stop ND’s 🤷🏻♂️ The learning is yours. Why give yourself the work of dealing with noise when a bit of education negates the need in a case such as this 🤷🏻♂️. Why introduce a problem if it can be avoided? When there is no option yes of course thats the time to use those skills in post. But having the skill and the software to deal with noise in post is not a reason to introduce and avoidable problem. The point in my original comment is bang on correct.
Of the harbour shots, number 3 is fav for me....nice colour and the long exposure makes the water look great. Good advice too about the ISO settings. Most people will do anything to keep the ISO at the lowest level, but experimenting and getting the shutter speed right can make or break an image. Excellent vid Ian
"ISO is not important" said the guy using the latest expensive gear. Give him a 10 yo camera. Spoiled by modern times. 10 years ago the videos were like: "techniques to make your hands steady using low speed shutter"
I was looking for a comment like yours. ISO doesn't matter that much nowadays with mirrorless around, but that is not true for older cameras. I own a D750 and going over 2000 is risky. Lighting is the key and sometime you gotta work for it. This video is to be taken with a grain of salt as this only apply to modern cameras in my experience.
I'm new to this field and I instantly saw what you all saw. New equipment you can worry less about ISO. However anything not of fairly recent quality, you do want to worry about ISO. Also a good photographer will be able to play with all of your settings to get the clearest, best photograph. So just improve your knowledge and skills for capturing that perfect photo. Don't settle though and just say "you can fix it in post" that's just simply lazy.
My fav of the four shots is number 1. I think the faster shutter speed actually brought more color into the shot. That, and the waves give it more texture overall. Great shot in the square format.
As someone who has done photography on a budget for a while now, I have some notes. For reference, I use an Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mk II. 1) If you're like me and only can afford an older camera, you won't have ISO invariance. Although colour noise is an issue with higher ISO, the bigger issue is how much you can change the exposure in post before you start to get artifacts (notably, a cell-shading-like effect in shadows or highlights). Ergo: 1a) If you're using a mirrorless and it has a feature to show you shadows and highlights live, turn this on. 1b) Lookup your camera sensor on DxOMark, specifically its dynamic range vs. ISO graph. The ISO where the curve crosses ~8 Ev is a good guess for the highest ISO you'll want to use. Some experimentation at high ISOs will be needed to nail down what you're comfortable with. 1c) As a rule of thumb, the higher the ISO you're using, the more you'll want to work to get the exposure right in camera. On my camera, ISO3200 is the highest I'm willing to go, so I know that if I'm shooting at, say, ISO1600, I have about 1 stop of exposure to work with in post. 2) Most cameras (even flagships) that support shooting below ISO200 do so with some support from the image processor. That is to say, there are diminishing returns in terms of noise reduction and dynamic range increase when lowering the ISO below 200. So going from ISO400 to ISO200 gets you a larger improvement than going from ISO200 to ISO100. 3) A variable ND filter is a nice tool for beginners... outside of landscape photography where corner-to-corner image quality matters more. It will let you control depth-of-field (via aperture) independently of shutter speed in brightly lit scenes, which can be useful if you want some motion blur in your photo. VNDs tend to create non-circular vignettes at their high end, though, so when going to buy one, consider its usable range to be one-to-two stops less than indicated. For example, I have an ND8-2000 (3 to 11 stops) which has a useful range of ND8-500 (3 to 9 stops).
I don't know if it is psychological or real, but my RAW files looked noticably punchier at 64 ISO than 100 on my D810, it doesn't really change anything on noise and sharpness, but the color depth was much better.
@@pierrevilley6675 Yeah, I should clarify that ISO64 will be better than ISO100 (it wasn't psychological), it's just that the step up in quality from ISO100 to ISO64 is smaller than the improvement from ISO400 to ISO250.
I think this is great advice. I’d like to add a footnote for film photographers. ISO has two components: ASA and DIN. So ISO 100 is 100/21, where 21 is the logarithmic scale. You can’t quite change ISO as easily when shooting film, but you can use interchangeable backs for medium format and different slides for large format so that you have a range of film speeds available.
We have it so good these days. As someone who shot weddings, sports etc. with film, the talk of variable ISOs, affordable 8000th sec shutters and 1.2 lenses, and the ability to check your shots and adjust while still standing in front of the subject, would have been unthinkable back then. When the first digitals arrived, (primitive as they were) the fact that you could adjust ISO from shot to shot (without changing out a whole roll or carrying an extra body) was the biggest breakthrough.
I use an m43 camera and 100% agree with your first example around event shooting. I'll stick it in shutter priority so that it just never drops too slow, use the iso auto caps, and let the camera adjust those small details. I was in a dim lit wedding reception for a family member taking snapshots and the noise was completely usable at iso2000 and 2500. Better than worrying about motion blur and camera shake, that's for sure!
@@diegoperezreyes8388 just an em10 iv. At the time, I was just using the 30mm f3.5 macro for the reception photos I mention. The overall noise just wasn't bad. there was noise, but it was very fine and wasn't distracting.
ISO is just gain for RAW photos that are darker. Increasing it increases noise. The real limitation is F-Stop, shutter speed, and overall sensor size, pixel density, and pixel sensitivity.
I really like the long exposure black&white because of the texture contrast of the water to the rest. Wow! Great video! Helped me on the path back into my old hobby.. subbed! 🙂
You mentioned the most important at the end. There are only two iso settings. Base and 2nd conversion gain. Keep you shutter speed where you need it to be and ignore the underexposure. Raise EV in post and pull back the highlights. A higher ISO setting leads to decreased dynamic range dramatically and this would be burnt into the raw file. If there is a low dynamic scene, well then you could raise the iso incamera and get the same result.
First timer here... I thoroughly enjoyed the presentation of topic. Nothing yanks my chain more than being talked down to... you were brilliant and encouraging and excited to educate. Thank you!
Shot #3 is what catches my attention most and draws me in; although if I had any of the others in my camera, I would be extremely pleased with evident combination of skill and luck. Thanks for the video - excellent points to consider. I now feel liberated from the self-imposed cage of low ISO numbers.
Number 2 for me. There is nice detail in the sky, and the monochrome gives a timeless feel. The slow shutter speed in number 4 in this case to me makes the sea look like mud or wet sand rather than water.
I love the no-nonsense practical approach, focussing on the expressional character of the image, rather than the tech-specs. As it should be. Subscribed ! 🙏🏾👍🏾
This has been a very good video. The waves crashing against the walls of the cliffs are breathtaking. I'm impressed to know you're from Wales. My ancestors are from Wales.
I remember joint a class in community college( mind you this was after teaching myself and shooting for 3 years) and they would start off the students setting their iso at 400 for day conditions. We were not allowed to go lower . 400 was they allowed parameter. The idea was to mimic iso400 film but with digital. So I definitely agree with your message that when conditions change , bumping the iso can benefit the other settings tremendously.
I've gone for Olympus Pro cameras as they have built in stabilization to avoid camera shake . A large selection of lenses with a few also featuring additional stabilization . Excellent quality , smaller cameras and smaller lenses . Good selection of second hand Olympus equipment as they have been around for a while . You can avoid having to lug tripods and tons of weight .
I love that i can set a range on my Fuji across three seperate preferances that are easy to apply on the go, i have 100-800, 800-3200 and 3200+++. Though typically i just set and forget at ISO 400 and go with the flow and enjoy the additional flexibility. Mostly using the auto ranges for night shooting where lighting can be extremely dynamic.
I often shoot with shutter speed and lens opening on Manual, to get the effects I want, and ISO on Auto so the exposure is correct. That lets the ISO be whatever it needs to be.
Thanks for sharing this video with us. I see ISO as yet another tool of our arsenal of creative decisions. It really depends in the subject and the vision I have for the image I want to capture. I've literally found myself adding "grain" to moody monochrome landscapes before. It adds to the dramatic tone of a storm, for example. That said, for an image I want as clean as possible, I absolutely have no issue keeping my camera mounted on my tripod and walking around like that so that I can quickly set up a low-ISO tripod shot. Or even use the tripod as a monopod if I want to be quick. Either way, my priority is to have a vision for my shot, and then do what I need to do to get it, rather than work the other way round and let my outcomes depend on the limitations of a choice I made before I envisioned my photograph.
I' fairly new to photography and mostly doing some macro stuff at the moment. What helps me is just trying different stuff are the direct controls on my X-T5. (coming from a 1200D) There is mostly no need for menu diving and I can just try stuff. Mostly it's "wrong" regarding people with more experience BUT today you can make thousands of photos with any additional cost. For me its time well spend and I can laugh about some of the results. Great video and thanks for the tipps.
Digital has give us the ability to experiment and play without the the costs that film used to have. I haven't shot a roll of film for 20years . I've just inherited a d3x and an F5 and they are a perfect pairing as controls are pretty much identical, although compared to my normal xt2 and x pro1 , a bit more of a physical workout
That's the thing though. There's too many people saying, "Do it this way," or "This way is the correct way," that everyone forgets you're supposed to experiment with what you have and find what you, the photographer, like.
#4 for me, i love the B&W photography lately. I have been watching lots of videos regarding ISO and more so, increasing it to get the better shot. I was always the 100 ISO type of photographer and have probably missed hundreds of good photos because of not wanting to use a higher ISO. Nice to see photographers choosing my small part of the world here in Pembrokeshire. I live about 6 miles away from Porthgain harbour, its a favourite of mine to walk and photograph.
Thanks for making this video, never really considered experimenting with higher iso and faster shutter speed, I always just assumed I was stuck with needing a tripod since i struggle with staying super steady. Still pretty new to photography and most videos seem to praise iso 100 as being the only option but from your examples that's clearly not the case. Image 1 and 2 are my favorite.
I new to photography... been shooting for a month.. I've been shooting ISO at so many different settings because i have no clue what im doing. I just gor for the shot that turns out good...
Image number 4 for me simply because I prefer B&W photography with a slow shutter speed but I'm certainly not averse to colour photography. Like you, I often take multiple shots of the same scene at different settings to see which shots I prefer. Thanks for the content you produce and keep the good work Ian, I enjoy viewing your videos which not only educate me but provide inspiration too. 👍
define natural.... there is no "natural" photo, just like people say that iphone is "natural" yes i do prefer 1 too, its colors are more soothing but dont just pick a photo that seems to be "natural" every photo goes through a lot of processing so Dont just throw around the term "natural" say true to life instead
I’ll stick with natural, thanks. What I mean is, as the eye sees it, instead of a soft blur. You’re overthinking it and your comment comes off as condescending.
Yea not sure which I prefer between 1 and 2, but might be leaning towards 1 because of, like you said, the realistic depiction of the scene. Water in #1 is much better
Cool informative video, nice style too - easy to watch! Loving the Fujifilm kit, had some myself a while back but ended up selling it because of the lack of lens choice, which has vastly improved over the last 3-4 years so considering getting an XS-10 now!
I've learned to become less obsessed with ISO in recent years. In a perfectly controlled studio environment, photographing for a client with specific needs, my rule is to shoot as low as possible and reproduce colour and detail as accurately as possible. For everything else, it's not a big concern, I let the scene and my emotions decide what is best. When creating for artistic purposes, things like perfect noise and perfect dynamic range don't matter so much. I am concerned with the story, creating an emotive piece, and that rarely requires a perfect reproduction of a scene. I often even add noise, reduce or alter colour, etc. Some photographers carry white cards and painstakingly obsess over histograms. Good for them. When it comes to creating art, I need people to feel an emotion or activate other senses. If someone is going to look at my photo and think "those flowers should be a different tint and there's too much noise for me to see the veins in that leaf", well, they are missing my point and are not my target audience. And that's OK.
@@ChrisJHintonphotography Thanks. I like to say that people will only judge you on the photos you take. No one cares about the photos you didn't take or the equipment you didn't use to make it. The image is its own story.
I’m shooting a roll of Ektar 100 on my Nikon F2 right now. The main reasons for choosing it are for the colors and saturation. Also, since it’s such a slow film, you can get really interesting long exposures. Yes. You need a tripod. I find ISO 100 makes me think a lot more before I shoot.
ISO Invariant is new and very interesting topic for me Ian! Thank you very much for very well explained video with the moon image. I will test it out with my Fuji camera. The harbour images 3 and 4 are my favourite!!
1 & 4. 1 has more hue to it, colors, where 3rd looks like weather has been overcasting on one side and the sun on the other. And 4th feels it has darker blacks, and stronger highlights.
Depens on what your shooting. If I shot in a studio at iso 200 when I didn't need to, I might have to stop doing product work because I won't have a high enough quality shot to work with in post.
I started photography using film when there was a huge difference between ISO when it came to graininess. ISO 100 vs ISO 400 or 800, huge difference. So now I hesitate to shoot with ISO above 100. But this video gives me something to think about.
Yes I had a BW background and a love of Ilford 400ASA film, because of its beautiful grey scale range. In digital I usually use 1600, to compensate for my elderly tremors, and there's no sign of graininess.
Another good information video when i first started i used to set I.S.O at 100 0n landscape but now its set on auto for quite a lot the new Denoise in L.R is brill so for my wildlife its auto all the time
ISO can be your friend or worst enemy depend on the camera and lens you're using, full frame vs APS-C, high megapixel vs low megapixel, long lens vs. short one, etc.
It's more a matter of sensor generation. Image-level noise/detail doesn't strongly depend on pixel count for a given sensor generation. For sensor size, when applying crop factor squared as an equivalence correction, the only difference, again within a sensor generation, is that larger sensors can go down to lower equivalence-corrected ISO settings, which has potential noise benefits if you can increase your subject illumination. I'm not really sure what you mean about long lens vs short lens. Camera shake maybe? Otherwise, focal length should be completely irrelevant to the ISO/noise discussion.
It is always a struggle between capturing detail and maintaining the atmospherics of the photo.. Cheeky request, how do you capture lightning shots? I have done one with a mobile at night but struggle with dslr. ( I shoot with Sony SLT A77 24mp). Thank you. Love your work.
WOW - never heard of ISO invariance. Very cool concept and I found my Nikon 6II is ISO Invariant so a whole new set of techniques are now part of my tool kit. Many Thanks.
I grew up shooting film where playing with the ASA/ISO was not always an option and it had to be the entire roll when it was. Kodachrome 25 was my film of choice and and auto exposure was not an option, but hand held meters and tripods were.. After over 60 years as a working photographer, I am quite comfortable with the ways I leaned to stop motion and camera shake decades ago.
7:47 why would you increase the ISO to get the desired shutter speed here? Instead of increasing the ISO, leave it at 100, set the aperture at F8 and the shutter speed to 1/3s and take the shot. It will be slightly underexposed but that is easy to correct in post (any noise you get from this are similar to raising the ISO)! You obtain a bit of highlight protection this way as well, handy for the foamy top of waves you might otherwise clip. Most cameras have dual gain sensors and are not ISO invariant. Raising ISO above that limit means you get less noise by raising ISO in camera than in post production. When you have an ISO invariant camera this doesn't make sense (although it is a bit hard to review on the spot when the result is almost pitch black!)
You are right, and its a very valid point regarding underexposing. The 2 end results would be virtually the same noise wise. I guess it comes down to wanting to get things as perfect as I can in camera, which is what I'm always looking to do. I'm always very mindful not to clip the histogram, so that wasn't a problem here. I don't think there's a right or wrong answer, I just like to shoot with intent as I find it more rewarding. 👍
Great video…I plan on experimenting with ISO after viewing this! Can you also include a separate link to your shutter release. I have an XT5 and I noticed you are a FUJI user!
I'd prefer the mix of 2 and 4 :-) For is more contrasty as I like however, I'm not big fan of smoothing water and clouds with long exposure. Some drama bump in the contrast in the sky is what I'd like to see here :-) Anyway, great composition.
When we have decent stabilisation, hand shake, camera shake, is not a thing but movement blur certainly is. May not think there is much movement blur in a landscape but a branch blowing about certainly is. I'm watching the tree waft about out of my window. Movement blur is a useable effect but that would look rather odd hand held for 2 seconds. Stabilisation can aid the AF at any shutter speed because the focus spot is not jiggling about. But don't go thinking stabilisation will let you use a lower ISO with a slower shutter to take a better photo, choose the shutter speed for the photo. What largely matters is what is happening in front of the lens and what you want to do with it.
3 and 4 for me ... and although I do like the long exposure on both, it's the colour (3) and contrast (4) which work better for me. A lovely composition, although I like the beacon/marker image even more, you really got the shutter speed spot on. A very interesting video as always and a good prompt to be more thoughtful about ISO use. Always enjoy your content, cheers!
Best poweruser hack to leverage automatisms/intelligence of the camera while retaining ability to manually set aperture and speed to your likings is to set the camera to manual (so you have control over both aperture and speed) while enabling auto-ISO (bonus if you can command the auto-ISO upper threshold). This is basically equivalent to a A+P priority mode
Good exposure is about good technique, which means correct shutter speed for the subject, aperture set to balance artistic and exposure needs, tripod or flash as required, and only then bump ISO if you run out of headroom on the other settings. If you're using auto ISO without knowing why, well you're a beginner and Einstein bless you! Experiment with other modes like shutter priority, aperture priority, and choose a fixed ISO when you do. Then you'll be forced to try various settings to get good exposure. Ultimately, learning to leverage the f-stop, shutter speed and ISO triangle comes with lots of practice. So get out there and shoot!
ISO is just a completely different beast these days. When i started in photography shooting film and early DSLRs you only went above 500 in desperate circumstances. Now with a modern mirrorless full frame camera 3200+ is fine. And lightroom now has an insane AI noise reduction tool.
ive shot video at 22500 iso on a canon c dslr at night with just a low powered street light for tv show - worked a wonder - no noticeable grain. ramping up iso if needed as u say no longer an issue in most cases
You can't adjust exposure in post-processing. Exposure is focal-plane illuminance times exposure time. That's set once you press the shutter button, it can't be changed after.
My vote is for exposure 4. I have this bias toward B&W, and I think it goes back to my high school darkroom days. Great points on ISO for me to consider in future outings. Thanks again for all your time and work to share these gems.
There was a reason that back in the day, low iso, or ASA gave you the finest gran makeup in your image, and using a tripod as well. If your shooting moving subjects, yes I can see it. If I'm doing landscapes. I'm always on a tripod. If I dont have to deal with noise in posg production, all the better.
Love the first minute or so, thanks Ian - that's exactly how I take most of my photos. Fix the shutter speed, choose your F stop and let ISO float (with a "limit", to avoid being completely ridiculous) - and then set the exposure compensation dial. And again, either side of 4 minutes. Tell me - do you rely on the built-in exposure meter, or use an external one? - lately, I've gone back to an external one, it's far more reliable, an "average" light reading is going to spend most of its life under or over, when we generally want something in between! I'm afraid I prefer to "freeze" the water, in real life I've never seen the kind of "creamy" effect a longer exposure gives the water, and I love the sparkle of water captured - frozen - in midair, just as it was when I was looking at it, before the shutter went off.
Yes, I agree. I think it was National Geographic who started the whole blurry waterfall phenomenon years ago. I don't particularly like the whole slow shutter thing. It may be art, but I want a photo to look real, not arty. It's way overused today, to the point that it's the rule rather than the exception. Same with editing. In the bad old days of Kodachrome, your workflow ended when you pressed the shutter. Your slide was the finished product. To my way of thinking a photographer takes pictures, a photo lab does the rest. Nowadays it seems we are expected to spend endless time on a computer doing what a darkroom guru used to do. Well, no thanks. I'm a retired computer programmer and the last thing I want to do is waste time on a computer driving Lightroom or Photoshop endlessly because I failed to get it right when I pressed the shutter. Same with shooting raw vs jpeg. Shoot raw to recover from your poor photography skills they tell you. Well, again, no thanks. My jpeg is like my old Kodachrome slide, the finished product. If it isn't good enough then I'd better improve my photography skills. Sorry, end of rant!
Ha ha - reading that, I am getting feelings of deja vu - for quite some time, I've felt I'm going around in a giant circle - turning back to where I've been, as if it's some crazy way of going forward that I've yet to explore. While all around me, everyone's always seeking something new, some strange idea, some completely different way of "taking a photo" - and I've been heading in the opposite direction. Like external light meters, instead of the built-in variety. And yes, I know why you're raising the comparison with Kodak slides. RAW is "interesting", but by no means a "perfect solution". Creating an image never stopped at the point where we removed our finger from the shutter button - but post processing has reached such strange extremes, that what we're ending up with barely rates the name "photograph". It's becoming more or less a product of various forms of AI - products of a computer, instead of a camera. Yes I know, I used to "dodge & burn" in my darkroom - but that's scarcely the same thing as all the "functions" we can - and most do! - use in all those programs. I started "trialling" them - comparing them - some years ago, and I now have over 70 of them on this computer. I've frankly given up on as many as I still play with. It's taught me a lot. And it's also taken my photography further around on that circle - I know of heaps of things I "could" do to my images - but I've discovered a "new me" - instead of more of this, I am becoming a great deal more selective, and my images are actually turning back to a style from the past. Because quite frankly I don't even like some of the styles these programs produce! Pixel hunting is a classic - more is NOT "better" - well not necessarily anyway. I've actually found my D500 more useful for action shots than my D850, and the older, smaller one has half the pixel count of the larger, new one. GAS isn't necessarily taking us forward - in many ways, it gets in the way of being more creative.
you should use ISO according to your camera specs. and if you google read noise chart for your camera you could be surprised as to what ISO is the cleanest for your camera.
It seems to me that Bill Claff's "Photographic Dynamic Range Shadow Improvement" is a more useful tool for practical purposes then the pure read noise, since it shows you where the shadow detail improvement levels off as you increase the ISO setting. For almost all cameras, you do get a benefit, although for newer cameras like the X-H2, only marginally so--that's why the last two example images were so similar
Shooting music events in small, dark pubs or outside at midnight, high ISO is my best friend. Already shooting at full opening with shutterspeeds to long for my own best, bumping ISO is my only chice. Always come home with images is my mantra, and I always do.
#2. Love the black and white. color just seems to be a distraction to me. Motion in the water seems to tell more of a story to me than the slower exposure. great tips. great vid.
👉A big thanks to everyone who has pre-ordered a copy of my zine, all of the proceeds will help to support future content like this. 🙏 www.iworthphotos.com/store/30-days-1
Does your camera have IBIS?
1:42
Is this in Porthgain Wales?
There are several reasons I often shoot at ISO 100(especially for landscape situations in difficult light). 1. More dynamic range. Most modern cameras gain 2-3 stops vs ISO 800. 2. Camera shake even hand held is a minor issue, easily handled. Modern mirrorless cameras now sport up to 6-7 stops of on board image stabilization. Shooting at shutter speeds of 1/focal length usually works.
hell of a lot of us don't have modern mirrorless cameras. I think this vid has mass appeal/application when you take that into consideration. I know my (poor) camera skills/shots improved from when I learned not to be frightened of upping the ISO.
I thought it was no less than 1/double your focal length.
Anything below 800 iso is a non issue. Ive gotten amazing shots with 3200 iso. My photography improved once I started to use higher iso. Motion blur and wrong aperture are much more damaging than high iso. Especially on modern cameras. Changes to those two impact how the image looks completely. Once I got comfortable shooting at iso ~800 I could use shorter exposures and smaller apertures which opened up my creativity alot. Now I set aperture, shutter, iso in that order rather than being stuck on max aperture and lowest iso. But thats just my experience.
As with any kind of art it comes down to preference. Dont be afraid to explore the options and learn what you prefer. Took a few thousand photos for me to dial in what I like in what situations. My advice is to just get out there and try stuff.
@@najadadavis It's a rule of thumb that dates back to the film era. But yeah with high resolution (36mp and up), you're quite right. If I'm moving while shooting I'll even try and keep it 1/triple focal length if it's at all possible
All of those things about shooting low ISO and shooting high shutter speeds are true if you have a fast, large aperture lens. Most beginers don't have those lenses. This is true even for low light photography and true for Videography with ND filters. You can truly apply these techniques only after you get a right gear.
Just don’t forget that ISO affects more than just noise - high ISO reduces dynamic range and color accuracy. Sometimes the trade off is worth it such as when freezing fast motion or when shooting at narrow apertures but most of the time you’ll get better results just using a tripod
Thank you!
"Just don’t forget that ISO affects more than just noise - high ISO reduces dynamic range and color accuracy." Not really. What reduces those is lowering your exposure, which you'll do when you raise the ISO, if you centre the meter. The effect on noise is the reverse of what people think. If you keep the exposure the same and raise the ISO you'll often reduce the noise, albeit slightly.
@@BobN54 Kinda depends on the sensor and ISO invariance/variance too. Sometimes you'll get a lower quality image by shooting at low ISO and raising in post, than if you just raised the ISO in the first place.
The new cameras usually allows to use really low ISOs although their natural ISO is higher (like 640 in Fuji X-T3 for example). But it allows only with ONE IMPORTANT restriction: you get a lower dynamic range! ISO640 can have 400DR but ISO80-100 can have only 100%DR.
@@orphanuprising Actually, not the sensor but the electronic processing after the sensor, dual-conversion gain, all kinds of stuff. The real point is that it's not 'ISO' that causes noise, it's the lowering of exposure that you get as a result of the ISO control changing the exposure at which the meter centres. It's all related to knowing what 'exposure' means, and that you can't change it in post ;-)
Before increasing ISO to obtain a briefer shutter time, take the 6 stop filter off! maybe put a three stop filter on. Or just a polariser, or polariser and 3 stop. Use a variable ND. Just a thought.
Hahaha love this comment 😂
So true
So now you need a 6-stop filter, a 3-stop filter, a polarizer and a variable ND? Not everyone is blessed with such choices in their gear collection. Besides, working your ISO is nothing to be afraid of and a skill you should learn.
@@ontheruntonowhere I disagree, raising ISO should be the last compromise. There are some great tools out their for dealing with higher ISO but they often cost more than a filter 🤷🏻♂️ which anyone with a digital camera, tripod for long exposures, storage cards, a computer to process, and software to process can probably afford an entry filter. And no filter is required at all to extend a shutter speed a few stops if your starting point is 800 iso, just dial down to the cameras base ISO 🤷🏻♂️
Besides the chap in the video has at least three of the four filters referenced! and my reference to a Variable ND was a budget option in place of the 6stop and 10 stop ND’s 🤷🏻♂️
The learning is yours. Why give yourself the work of dealing with noise when a bit of education negates the need in a case such as this 🤷🏻♂️. Why introduce a problem if it can be avoided? When there is no option yes of course thats the time to use those skills in post. But having the skill and the software to deal with noise in post is not a reason to introduce and avoidable problem. The point in my original comment is bang on correct.
@@markr3926 Well, to each their own. That's what makes photography art, everyone does it differently.
Of the harbour shots, number 3 is fav for me....nice colour and the long exposure makes the water look great. Good advice too about the ISO settings. Most people will do anything to keep the ISO at the lowest level, but experimenting and getting the shutter speed right can make or break an image. Excellent vid Ian
Glad you enjoyed it buddy and thanks for the comment🙏
Agree all around
❤ agreed
Agreed :)
"ISO is not important" said the guy using the latest expensive gear. Give him a 10 yo camera. Spoiled by modern times. 10 years ago the videos were like: "techniques to make your hands steady using low speed shutter"
What kind of potato did you have 10 years ago?
@@josefsvitak4313baked.
Ha this would of been me saying this but now I have an R5 so careless 😂
I was looking for a comment like yours. ISO doesn't matter that much nowadays with mirrorless around, but that is not true for older cameras. I own a D750 and going over 2000 is risky. Lighting is the key and sometime you gotta work for it. This video is to be taken with a grain of salt as this only apply to modern cameras in my experience.
I'm new to this field and I instantly saw what you all saw. New equipment you can worry less about ISO. However anything not of fairly recent quality, you do want to worry about ISO.
Also a good photographer will be able to play with all of your settings to get the clearest, best photograph. So just improve your knowledge and skills for capturing that perfect photo. Don't settle though and just say "you can fix it in post" that's just simply lazy.
My fav of the four shots is number 1. I think the faster shutter speed actually brought more color into the shot. That, and the waves give it more texture overall. Great shot in the square format.
Thanks buddy 🙏🙏👍
Indeed! 👍
As someone who has done photography on a budget for a while now, I have some notes. For reference, I use an Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mk II.
1) If you're like me and only can afford an older camera, you won't have ISO invariance. Although colour noise is an issue with higher ISO, the bigger issue is how much you can change the exposure in post before you start to get artifacts (notably, a cell-shading-like effect in shadows or highlights). Ergo:
1a) If you're using a mirrorless and it has a feature to show you shadows and highlights live, turn this on.
1b) Lookup your camera sensor on DxOMark, specifically its dynamic range vs. ISO graph. The ISO where the curve crosses ~8 Ev is a good guess for the highest ISO you'll want to use. Some experimentation at high ISOs will be needed to nail down what you're comfortable with.
1c) As a rule of thumb, the higher the ISO you're using, the more you'll want to work to get the exposure right in camera. On my camera, ISO3200 is the highest I'm willing to go, so I know that if I'm shooting at, say, ISO1600, I have about 1 stop of exposure to work with in post.
2) Most cameras (even flagships) that support shooting below ISO200 do so with some support from the image processor. That is to say, there are diminishing returns in terms of noise reduction and dynamic range increase when lowering the ISO below 200. So going from ISO400 to ISO200 gets you a larger improvement than going from ISO200 to ISO100.
3) A variable ND filter is a nice tool for beginners... outside of landscape photography where corner-to-corner image quality matters more. It will let you control depth-of-field (via aperture) independently of shutter speed in brightly lit scenes, which can be useful if you want some motion blur in your photo. VNDs tend to create non-circular vignettes at their high end, though, so when going to buy one, consider its usable range to be one-to-two stops less than indicated. For example, I have an ND8-2000 (3 to 11 stops) which has a useful range of ND8-500 (3 to 9 stops).
I don't know if it is psychological or real, but my RAW files looked noticably punchier at 64 ISO than 100 on my D810, it doesn't really change anything on noise and sharpness, but the color depth was much better.
@@pierrevilley6675 Yeah, I should clarify that ISO64 will be better than ISO100 (it wasn't psychological), it's just that the step up in quality from ISO100 to ISO64 is smaller than the improvement from ISO400 to ISO250.
I think this is great advice. I’d like to add a footnote for film photographers. ISO has two components: ASA and DIN. So ISO 100 is 100/21, where 21 is the logarithmic scale. You can’t quite change ISO as easily when shooting film, but you can use interchangeable backs for medium format and different slides for large format so that you have a range of film speeds available.
Nice comment 👍👍
We have it so good these days. As someone who shot weddings, sports etc. with film, the talk of variable ISOs, affordable 8000th sec shutters and 1.2 lenses, and the ability to check your shots and adjust while still standing in front of the subject, would have been unthinkable back then. When the first digitals arrived, (primitive as they were) the fact that you could adjust ISO from shot to shot (without changing out a whole roll or carrying an extra body) was the biggest breakthrough.
Just as big a breakthrough is that the cost of film was eliminated, as well as the inconvenience of having to reload it after every so many shots
I use an m43 camera and 100% agree with your first example around event shooting. I'll stick it in shutter priority so that it just never drops too slow, use the iso auto caps, and let the camera adjust those small details. I was in a dim lit wedding reception for a family member taking snapshots and the noise was completely usable at iso2000 and 2500. Better than worrying about motion blur and camera shake, that's for sure!
What camera do you use? I have a GX9 and can't stand the noise after ISO 1000
@@diegoperezreyes8388 just an em10 iv. At the time, I was just using the 30mm f3.5 macro for the reception photos I mention. The overall noise just wasn't bad. there was noise, but it was very fine and wasn't distracting.
ISO is just gain for RAW photos that are darker. Increasing it increases noise. The real limitation is F-Stop, shutter speed, and overall sensor size, pixel density, and pixel sensitivity.
Of the harbour pictures, I love the 3rd one - Colored with long exposure. Looks fantastic.
Thanks
I really like the long exposure black&white because of the texture contrast of the water to the rest.
Wow! Great video! Helped me on the path back into my old hobby.. subbed! 🙂
Harbour shots, I'd absolutely vote for No.3 hands down.
Great Video. Thx for that one.
Cheers, Mike
You mentioned the most important at the end. There are only two iso settings. Base and 2nd conversion gain. Keep you shutter speed where you need it to be and ignore the underexposure. Raise EV in post and pull back the highlights. A higher ISO setting leads to decreased dynamic range dramatically and this would be burnt into the raw file. If there is a low dynamic scene, well then you could raise the iso incamera and get the same result.
Yes thank you!
First timer here... I thoroughly enjoyed the presentation of topic. Nothing yanks my chain more than being talked down to... you were brilliant and encouraging and excited to educate. Thank you!
Shot #3 is what catches my attention most and draws me in; although if I had any of the others in my camera, I would be extremely pleased with evident combination of skill and luck. Thanks for the video - excellent points to consider. I now feel liberated from the self-imposed cage of low ISO numbers.
Thanks buddy, much appreciated 👍
Number 2 for me. There is nice detail in the sky, and the monochrome gives a timeless feel.
The slow shutter speed in number 4 in this case to me makes the sea look like mud or wet sand rather than water.
Thanks Simon 👍
I love the no-nonsense practical approach, focussing on the expressional character of the image, rather than the tech-specs.
As it should be. Subscribed ! 🙏🏾👍🏾
This has been a very good video. The waves crashing against the walls of the cliffs are breathtaking. I'm impressed to know you're from Wales. My ancestors are from Wales.
Glad you enjoyed it! and that's interesting to hear. 👍👍
I remember joint a class in community college( mind you this was after teaching myself and shooting for 3 years) and they would start off the students setting their iso at 400 for day conditions. We were not allowed to go lower . 400 was they allowed parameter.
The idea was to mimic iso400 film but with digital. So I definitely agree with your message that when conditions change , bumping the iso can benefit the other settings tremendously.
Higher iso,s are great for black n white , even night shooting in b&w , awesome otherwise im a low as you can go iso 64 awesome quality
I've gone for Olympus Pro cameras as they have built in stabilization to avoid camera shake . A large selection of lenses with a few also featuring additional stabilization . Excellent quality , smaller cameras and smaller lenses .
Good selection of second hand Olympus equipment as they have been around for a while . You can avoid having to lug tripods and tons of weight .
I love that i can set a range on my Fuji across three seperate preferances that are easy to apply on the go, i have 100-800, 800-3200 and 3200+++. Though typically i just set and forget at ISO 400 and go with the flow and enjoy the additional flexibility. Mostly using the auto ranges for night shooting where lighting can be extremely dynamic.
I often shoot with shutter speed and lens opening on Manual, to get the effects I want, and ISO on Auto so the exposure is correct. That lets the ISO be whatever it needs to be.
Thanks for sharing this video with us.
I see ISO as yet another tool of our arsenal of creative decisions. It really depends in the subject and the vision I have for the image I want to capture. I've literally found myself adding "grain" to moody monochrome landscapes before. It adds to the dramatic tone of a storm, for example. That said, for an image I want as clean as possible, I absolutely have no issue keeping my camera mounted on my tripod and walking around like that so that I can quickly set up a low-ISO tripod shot. Or even use the tripod as a monopod if I want to be quick.
Either way, my priority is to have a vision for my shot, and then do what I need to do to get it, rather than work the other way round and let my outcomes depend on the limitations of a choice I made before I envisioned my photograph.
I feel like I understand something new by the end of this, so well done getting a concept through my thick skull.
That's awesome 👍👍
I' fairly new to photography and mostly doing some macro stuff at the moment.
What helps me is just trying different stuff are the direct controls on my X-T5. (coming from a 1200D)
There is mostly no need for menu diving and I can just try stuff. Mostly it's "wrong" regarding people with more experience BUT today you can make thousands of photos with any additional cost.
For me its time well spend and I can laugh about some of the results.
Great video and thanks for the tipps.
Me with a T5 as a beginner 😅
@@tapelongwenya ?
When you are not afraid to play around is for me when I think you can learn a great deal not only about setting ya but about your camera
Digital has give us the ability to experiment and play without the the costs that film used to have. I haven't shot a roll of film for 20years . I've just inherited a d3x and an F5 and they are a perfect pairing as controls are pretty much identical, although compared to my normal xt2 and x pro1 , a bit more of a physical workout
That's the thing though. There's too many people saying, "Do it this way," or "This way is the correct way," that everyone forgets you're supposed to experiment with what you have and find what you, the photographer, like.
#4 for me, i love the B&W photography lately. I have been watching lots of videos regarding ISO and more so, increasing it to get the better shot. I was always the 100 ISO type of photographer and have probably missed hundreds of good photos because of not wanting to use a higher ISO. Nice to see photographers choosing my small part of the world here in Pembrokeshire. I live about 6 miles away from Porthgain harbour, its a favourite of mine to walk and photograph.
Thanks for making this video, never really considered experimenting with higher iso and faster shutter speed, I always just assumed I was stuck with needing a tripod since i struggle with staying super steady. Still pretty new to photography and most videos seem to praise iso 100 as being the only option but from your examples that's clearly not the case. Image 1 and 2 are my favorite.
Thanks so much
I like 1&2. I love the color in the backdrop, and the black and white are so soft
Hey Ian I discovered today that a high pass filter is great for removing wind noise, should work with your voice too if you set it correctly
I new to photography... been shooting for a month.. I've been shooting ISO at so many different settings because i have no clue what im doing. I just gor for the shot that turns out good...
Image number 4 for me simply because I prefer B&W photography with a slow shutter speed but I'm certainly not averse to colour photography. Like you, I often take multiple shots of the same scene at different settings to see which shots I prefer. Thanks for the content you produce and keep the good work Ian, I enjoy viewing your videos which not only educate me but provide inspiration too. 👍
Great discussion, I’m learning a tilt shift for landscape but iso is proving important to keep depth of field
Great video, Ian! Thanks for having this channel!!
I prefer #1 on the harbor photo for the various colors and textures. I like seeing the water naturally.
define natural.... there is no "natural" photo, just like people say that iphone is "natural"
yes i do prefer 1 too, its colors are more soothing
but dont just pick a photo that seems to be "natural"
every photo goes through a lot of processing so
Dont just throw around the term "natural"
say true to life instead
I’ll stick with natural, thanks. What I mean is, as the eye sees it, instead of a soft blur.
You’re overthinking it and your comment comes off as condescending.
Yea not sure which I prefer between 1 and 2, but might be leaning towards 1 because of, like you said, the realistic depiction of the scene. Water in #1 is much better
A subject I was already aware of, but incredibly well covered and detailed. Great work on this video!
Glad it was helpful! 👍👍
Cool informative video, nice style too - easy to watch! Loving the Fujifilm kit, had some myself a while back but ended up selling it because of the lack of lens choice, which has vastly improved over the last 3-4 years so considering getting an XS-10 now!
Awesome, thank you!
I've learned to become less obsessed with ISO in recent years. In a perfectly controlled studio environment, photographing for a client with specific needs, my rule is to shoot as low as possible and reproduce colour and detail as accurately as possible. For everything else, it's not a big concern, I let the scene and my emotions decide what is best. When creating for artistic purposes, things like perfect noise and perfect dynamic range don't matter so much. I am concerned with the story, creating an emotive piece, and that rarely requires a perfect reproduction of a scene. I often even add noise, reduce or alter colour, etc. Some photographers carry white cards and painstakingly obsess over histograms. Good for them. When it comes to creating art, I need people to feel an emotion or activate other senses. If someone is going to look at my photo and think "those flowers should be a different tint and there's too much noise for me to see the veins in that leaf", well, they are missing my point and are not my target audience. And that's OK.
Yes!!! Finally someone I agree with. It’s your photo !
@@ChrisJHintonphotography Thanks. I like to say that people will only judge you on the photos you take. No one cares about the photos you didn't take or the equipment you didn't use to make it. The image is its own story.
I’m happy you talked about the iso invariant @ 9:00
I do this myself and have not seen any talk about this yet.
I’m shooting a roll of Ektar 100 on my Nikon F2 right now. The main reasons for choosing it are for the colors and saturation. Also, since it’s such a slow film, you can get really interesting long exposures. Yes. You need a tripod. I find ISO 100 makes me think a lot more before I shoot.
This is really interesting and I need to rewatch this several times to fully inderstand it.
Thanks buddy, glad you found it interesting 👍👍
That walk from Porthgain to Abereiddy and return must be one of the best in Pembrokeshire. The Sloop inn is well worth a visit as well!
it's certainly is a cracker mate. I haven't had a pint in the sloop yet, how's the food there?
@@ian_worth It's been a good few years since I was last there. It was excellent then!
ISO Invariant is new and very interesting topic for me Ian! Thank you very much for very well explained video with the moon image. I will test it out with my Fuji camera. The harbour images 3 and 4 are my favourite!!
Glad you enjoyed it! 👍👍
1 & 4. 1 has more hue to it, colors, where 3rd looks like weather has been overcasting on one side and the sun on the other. And 4th feels it has darker blacks, and stronger highlights.
Thanks buddy 👍👍👍
Depens on what your shooting. If I shot in a studio at iso 200 when I didn't need to, I might have to stop doing product work because I won't have a high enough quality shot to work with in post.
I started photography using film when there was a huge difference between ISO when it came to graininess. ISO 100 vs ISO 400 or 800, huge difference. So now I hesitate to shoot with ISO above 100. But this video gives me something to think about.
Yes I had a BW background and a love of Ilford 400ASA film, because of its beautiful grey scale range. In digital I usually use 1600, to compensate for my elderly tremors, and there's no sign of graininess.
Another good information video when i first started i used to set I.S.O at 100 0n landscape but now its set on auto for quite a lot the new Denoise in L.R is brill so for my wildlife its auto all the time
Cheers Doug, Yeah, that denoise feature is pretty amazing 👍👍
Thanks Ian for sharing your experience with great comments & results...#4 is what I like... great location.... cheers from Australia 🦘🦘😊
Glad you enjoyed it Robert 👍👍
Very instructive!Man that place looks exactly like Newfoundland. New subscribers here!Good luck!
Awesome, thank you!
ISO can be your friend or worst enemy depend on the camera and lens you're using, full frame vs APS-C, high megapixel vs low megapixel, long lens vs. short one, etc.
Thanks buddy 👍
It's more a matter of sensor generation. Image-level noise/detail doesn't strongly depend on pixel count for a given sensor generation. For sensor size, when applying crop factor squared as an equivalence correction, the only difference, again within a sensor generation, is that larger sensors can go down to lower equivalence-corrected ISO settings, which has potential noise benefits if you can increase your subject illumination. I'm not really sure what you mean about long lens vs short lens. Camera shake maybe? Otherwise, focal length should be completely irrelevant to the ISO/noise discussion.
@@jonpaulpepen9470 Sorry, I meant zoom lens, not long lens. Zoom lens have move glass in it and therefore reducing the amount of light coming through.
2 I think has a good structure and contrast. The detail in the cloud is also more refined
Thanks so much 👍
It is always a struggle between capturing detail and maintaining the atmospherics of the photo.. Cheeky request, how do you capture lightning shots? I have done one with a mobile at night but struggle with dslr. ( I shoot with Sony SLT A77 24mp). Thank you. Love your work.
WOW - never heard of ISO invariance. Very cool concept and I found my Nikon 6II is ISO Invariant so a whole new set of techniques are now part of my tool kit. Many Thanks.
Glad it was helpful! 👍
I grew up shooting film where playing with the ASA/ISO was not always an option and it had to be the entire roll when it was. Kodachrome 25 was my film of choice and and auto exposure was not an option, but hand held meters and tripods were.. After over 60 years as a working photographer, I am quite comfortable with the ways I leaned to stop motion and camera shake decades ago.
7:47 why would you increase the ISO to get the desired shutter speed here? Instead of increasing the ISO, leave it at 100, set the aperture at F8 and the shutter speed to 1/3s and take the shot. It will be slightly underexposed but that is easy to correct in post (any noise you get from this are similar to raising the ISO)! You obtain a bit of highlight protection this way as well, handy for the foamy top of waves you might otherwise clip.
Most cameras have dual gain sensors and are not ISO invariant. Raising ISO above that limit means you get less noise by raising ISO in camera than in post production. When you have an ISO invariant camera this doesn't make sense (although it is a bit hard to review on the spot when the result is almost pitch black!)
You are right, and its a very valid point regarding underexposing. The 2 end results would be virtually the same noise wise. I guess it comes down to wanting to get things as perfect as I can in camera, which is what I'm always looking to do. I'm always very mindful not to clip the histogram, so that wasn't a problem here. I don't think there's a right or wrong answer, I just like to shoot with intent as I find it more rewarding. 👍
You defo make some of the best explained video out there. Tha ks
Thanks Paul, that means a lot mate 👍👍
Tremendous video. As a landscape photographer, I appreciate this video much. Thank you Sir.
My favorite was image #1. I liked the colour of the sky better. It just seemed to have better colours.
Favourite photo, the two bw since the colors weren't such a thing in the shots. And the small white house adds a lot in monochrome. Nice video
Hi Ian. Cracking video. Really well explained. ISO invariance is a gift, especially for us astrophotographers ! Thanks for sharing.
Great video Ian!
Great video…I plan on experimenting with ISO after viewing this! Can you also include a separate link
to your shutter release. I have an XT5 and I noticed you are a FUJI user!
Sorry, I cant find a link for it, but it was just a cheap one of Amazon 👍
A great video & excellent content, with detailed real use cases for varied ISO. I just subbed!
Awesome, thank you! 👍👍
Thank you for all the tips. I recognize beautiful Porthgain along the gorgeous Pembrokeshire coast.
Thanks for taking the time to make this video.
My pleasure! 👍👍
Really great advice, Ian. And one that easy to fall away from and get lazy.
Thanks Kevin, much appreciated 👍👍
2, but 4 is also nice. Suits in B&W, nothing wrong with the color ones. Good picture!
Hi Ian interesting vision about higher iso in landscape shooting. I was wondering what gear head you're using in this video? Thnx!
Usually I use filters to help my job, like kase or Nisi. It's helpful for me to adjust the light.
Great work! How does shooting at higher ISO impact the dynamic range?
Thanks! I’m old school so always wanted the lowest ISO possible for print. I still feel icky at 400 but I’m going to try and let it go!
I'd prefer the mix of 2 and 4 :-) For is more contrasty as I like however, I'm not big fan of smoothing water and clouds with long exposure. Some drama bump in the contrast in the sky is what I'd like to see here :-) Anyway, great composition.
ooh, Porthgain! Close to home. :D. I liked the square format and all the shots.
Compromising on color accuracy, dynamic range, and noise because setting up a tripod for a landscape takes too much time? If you say so👍
Excellent content! Thanks for taking me along!
When we have decent stabilisation, hand shake, camera shake, is not a thing but movement blur certainly is. May not think there is much movement blur in a landscape but a branch blowing about certainly is. I'm watching the tree waft about out of my window. Movement blur is a useable effect but that would look rather odd hand held for 2 seconds. Stabilisation can aid the AF at any shutter speed because the focus spot is not jiggling about.
But don't go thinking stabilisation will let you use a lower ISO with a slower shutter to take a better photo, choose the shutter speed for the photo. What largely matters is what is happening in front of the lens and what you want to do with it.
what bag is that it looks really good
3 and 4 for me ... and although I do like the long exposure on both, it's the colour (3) and contrast (4) which work better for me. A lovely composition, although I like the beacon/marker image even more, you really got the shutter speed spot on. A very interesting video as always and a good prompt to be more thoughtful about ISO use. Always enjoy your content, cheers!
Thanks Brendan, really appreciate your comment 🙏👍👍
Best poweruser hack to leverage automatisms/intelligence of the camera while retaining ability to manually set aperture and speed to your likings is to set the camera to manual (so you have control over both aperture and speed) while enabling auto-ISO (bonus if you can command the auto-ISO upper threshold). This is basically equivalent to a A+P priority mode
Good exposure is about good technique, which means correct shutter speed for the subject, aperture set to balance artistic and exposure needs, tripod or flash as required, and only then bump ISO if you run out of headroom on the other settings. If you're using auto ISO without knowing why, well you're a beginner and Einstein bless you! Experiment with other modes like shutter priority, aperture priority, and choose a fixed ISO when you do. Then you'll be forced to try various settings to get good exposure. Ultimately, learning to leverage the f-stop, shutter speed and ISO triangle comes with lots of practice. So get out there and shoot!
Number 3. Thank you for your passion and inspiration!
ISO is just a completely different beast these days. When i started in photography shooting film and early DSLRs you only went above 500 in desperate circumstances. Now with a modern mirrorless full frame camera 3200+ is fine. And lightroom now has an insane AI noise reduction tool.
ive shot video at 22500 iso on a canon c dslr at night with just a low powered street light for tv show - worked a wonder - no noticeable grain. ramping up iso if needed as u say no longer an issue in most cases
Harbour shot 4 for me BW longer exposure. Also the tip of under expose to preserve the highlights 👍
Many thanks 👍😊
I wonder if you could tell me with which camera did you shot yourself talking to the camera?
i struggle to find where i can find my shutter speed on my sony rx10. Ian, if you can help me out with this it'll help a lot. thank you in advance
You can't adjust exposure in post-processing. Exposure is focal-plane illuminance times exposure time. That's set once you press the shutter button, it can't be changed after.
My vote is for exposure 4. I have this bias toward B&W, and I think it goes back to my high school darkroom days. Great points on ISO for me to consider in future outings. Thanks again for all your time and work to share these gems.
Many thanks for watching and commenting 🙏🙏😊
Wowow this tenic is do. Powerful
There was a reason that back in the day, low iso, or ASA gave you the finest gran makeup in your image, and using a tripod as well. If your shooting moving subjects, yes I can see it. If I'm doing landscapes. I'm always on a tripod. If I dont have to deal with noise in posg production, all the better.
Many thanks for your thoughts. I’ll have to review my technique.
Love the first minute or so, thanks Ian - that's exactly how I take most of my photos. Fix the shutter speed, choose your F stop and let ISO float (with a "limit", to avoid being completely ridiculous) - and then set the exposure compensation dial. And again, either side of 4 minutes.
Tell me - do you rely on the built-in exposure meter, or use an external one? - lately, I've gone back to an external one, it's far more reliable, an "average" light reading is going to spend most of its life under or over, when we generally want something in between!
I'm afraid I prefer to "freeze" the water, in real life I've never seen the kind of "creamy" effect a longer exposure gives the water, and I love the sparkle of water captured - frozen - in midair, just as it was when I was looking at it, before the shutter went off.
Yes, I agree. I think it was National Geographic who started the whole blurry waterfall phenomenon years ago. I don't particularly like the whole slow shutter thing. It may be art, but I want a photo to look real, not arty. It's way overused today, to the point that it's the rule rather than the exception. Same with editing. In the bad old days of Kodachrome, your workflow ended when you pressed the shutter. Your slide was the finished product. To my way of thinking a photographer takes pictures, a photo lab does the rest. Nowadays it seems we are expected to spend endless time on a computer doing what a darkroom guru used to do. Well, no thanks. I'm a retired computer programmer and the last thing I want to do is waste time on a computer driving Lightroom or Photoshop endlessly because I failed to get it right when I pressed the shutter. Same with shooting raw vs jpeg. Shoot raw to recover from your poor photography skills they tell you. Well, again, no thanks. My jpeg is like my old Kodachrome slide, the finished product. If it isn't good enough then I'd better improve my photography skills. Sorry, end of rant!
@@pentaxfan4445
Ha ha - reading that, I am getting feelings of deja vu - for quite some time, I've felt I'm going around in a giant circle - turning back to where I've been, as if it's some crazy way of going forward that I've yet to explore. While all around me, everyone's always seeking something new, some strange idea, some completely different way of "taking a photo" - and I've been heading in the opposite direction. Like external light meters, instead of the built-in variety. And yes, I know why you're raising the comparison with Kodak slides. RAW is "interesting", but by no means a "perfect solution". Creating an image never stopped at the point where we removed our finger from the shutter button - but post processing has reached such strange extremes, that what we're ending up with barely rates the name "photograph". It's becoming more or less a product of various forms of AI - products of a computer, instead of a camera.
Yes I know, I used to "dodge & burn" in my darkroom - but that's scarcely the same thing as all the "functions" we can - and most do! - use in all those programs. I started "trialling" them - comparing them - some years ago, and I now have over 70 of them on this computer. I've frankly given up on as many as I still play with. It's taught me a lot. And it's also taken my photography further around on that circle - I know of heaps of things I "could" do to my images - but I've discovered a "new me" - instead of more of this, I am becoming a great deal more selective, and my images are actually turning back to a style from the past. Because quite frankly I don't even like some of the styles these programs produce!
Pixel hunting is a classic - more is NOT "better" - well not necessarily anyway. I've actually found my D500 more useful for action shots than my D850, and the older, smaller one has half the pixel count of the larger, new one. GAS isn't necessarily taking us forward - in many ways, it gets in the way of being more creative.
I also use higher ISO for my B&W photography to add grain like a film photo
you should use ISO according to your camera specs. and if you google read noise chart for your camera you could be surprised as to what ISO is the cleanest for your camera.
It seems to me that Bill Claff's "Photographic Dynamic Range Shadow Improvement" is a more useful tool for practical purposes then the pure read noise, since it shows you where the shadow detail improvement levels off as you increase the ISO setting. For almost all cameras, you do get a benefit, although for newer cameras like the X-H2, only marginally so--that's why the last two example images were so similar
Brilliant, Ian, as usual. Thank you!
Shooting music events in small, dark pubs or outside at midnight, high ISO is my best friend. Already shooting at full opening with shutterspeeds to long for my own best, bumping ISO is my only chice. Always come home with images is my mantra, and I always do.
Awesome. Thanks buddy 👍
Good information. I will experiment with several of these concepts. Much appreciated
#2. Love the black and white. color just seems to be a distraction to me. Motion in the water seems to tell more of a story to me than the slower exposure. great tips. great vid.
What kind of back pack are you using sir?
You can view my equipment here 👉 www.iworthphotos.com/my-gear
Nice show! my favourite is number 3!